Talk:Hispano-Suiza J12

Wheelbases

I have had cause to revisit the references for this article. Apart from The Illustrated Directory of Classic Cars by Graham Robson, whose preview is no longer available on Google Books, I have access to all the listed sources at present. Period Cars by Gianni Rogliatti is at the Kingston and St. Andrew Parish Library, and I own copies of the others.

I added two new references today, one of which was The Classic Car, edited by Beverly Rae Kimes and published by the Classic Car Club of America. The four wheelbases offered for the J12 are given to the nearest quarter-inch on page 648 of that book. The sources used for this article give wheelbases to the nearest inch. I will attempt to represent this in a table:

Wheelbase options for the Hispano-Suiza J12
Wheelbase description*	Kimes, 1990, p. 648	Robson, 2001, pp. 248–249	Scott, 1991, p. 52	Rogliatti, 1973, p. 77
Short	134+1⁄2 in (3,416 mm)	135 in (3,429 mm)	135 in (3,429 mm)	11 ft 3 in (3,429 mm)
Light	146 in (3,708 mm)	146 in (3,708 mm)	146 in (3,708 mm)	not stated
Normal	150 in (3,810 mm)	150 in (3,810 mm)	not stated	not stated
Long	157+3⁄4 in (4,007 mm)	158 in (4,013 mm)	158 in (4,013 mm)	13 ft 2 in (4,013 mm)

Note: *The wheelbase descriptions are from Kimes, 1990, p. 648.

What should be done?

Should the existing data with the existing sources be retained?
Should the data from Kimes be added and Kimes be referenced (along with the others with the middle wheelbases where applicable, as these tend to be the same for all sources)?
Should things be left as they were until we find a source with metric units (after all, this is a French car)?

I await any input that will help resolve this.

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 01:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm delighted that you found another reference for the 150 inch wheelbase, and even more delighted that it is authored by the late Beverly Rae Kimes, often referred to as the "First Lady of Automotive History".

My first inclination in such instances would be to footnote all of the sources of which a majority are in agreement, and to ignore the outliers. That is, you should add Kimes to the footnotes for the 146 inch and 150 inch wheelbases, but not cite her for the other two wheelbases, as the other three sources are in agreement, and apparently disagree with her.

But there are references, and then there are references. Kimes has a certain gravitas in the world of automotive history, and this should give one pause. She was known to be fastidious about accuracy, and what appears to be disagreement is more likely due to her providing us data with greater precision. All four sources agree to the nearest inch, apparently Kimes goes a step further and gives us the figures to the nearest quarter inch (or perhaps even better).

If I were you, I would keep the existing figures formatted to be rounded to the nearest inch, footnote Kimes (p. 648) on all four wheelbase lengths, and include a short explanation in her footnote about the apparently more precise figures she provides for the short and long wheelbase lengths.

Sadowski (talk) 14:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done, sort of: I haven't followed your advice to the letter; I just added a straightforward citation to Kimes where the value did not differ and added what Kimes said the value was to the citations where the values differed. Please let me know if that's not adequate; I'll try to figure out something better in case it isn't. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 18:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that's more or less what I had in mind. Thanks. Sadowski (talk) 21:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]